"Opps..." an article needing a reply?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

"Opps..." an article needing a reply?

Brad Fuller
I wonder if this needs some replies by more experienced language-experts
than myself:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/9246

No one has challenged him but many have apparently read his blog as he
is ranked 6th on the top 25 weblogs at O'Reilly.
It's a bit of a ramble, and i don't exactly know what he wants to say in
the end. He challenges and admires the features of oop in both design
and application at various times, but goes on to explain why it doesn't
work in the long run. What I gather is that his article strategy is to
explain the evolution of why and how languages are moving away from oop.

Not surprising, smalltalk is not mentioned.

brad

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Opps..." an article needing a reply?

Edgar J. De Cleene
Brad Fuller puso en su mail :

> I wonder if this needs some replies by more experienced language-experts
> than myself:
>
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/9246
>
> No one has challenged him but many have apparently read his blog as he
> is ranked 6th on the top 25 weblogs at O'Reilly.
> It's a bit of a ramble, and i don't exactly know what he wants to say in
> the end. He challenges and admires the features of oop in both design
> and application at various times, but goes on to explain why it doesn't
> work in the long run. What I gather is that his article strategy is to
> explain the evolution of why and how languages are moving away from oop.
>
> Not surprising, smalltalk is not mentioned.
>
> brad
Any person could believe what suit he/she.

And what many share same don't means what that believe is true.

As example as today is 13 many could think reply this mail could be bad
luck.


Edgar



       
       
               
___________________________________________________________
1GB gratis, Antivirus y Antispam
Correo Yahoo!, el mejor correo web del mundo
http://correo.yahoo.com.ar 


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

ccrraaiigg
In reply to this post by Brad Fuller

        Yet another fluff piece from O'Reilly. Wow, what a surprise.


-C



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Brad Fuller
Craig Latta wrote:
>
>     Yet another fluff piece from O'Reilly. Wow, what a surprise.
Not really from O'Reilly... but from this guys blog that O'Reilly sponsors.

I'm very happy with the technical quality of O'Reilly books. Am I
missing something?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Jecel Assumpcao Jr
Brad,
> I'm very happy with the technical quality of O'Reilly books. Am I
> missing something?

everything that guy wrote makes perfect sense and is very true... from a
certain viewpoint (to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi (no need to point out that I
slightly changed the wording - I did it on purpose)). And that viewpoint
is that OOP means Simula->C++->Java. See the "Algol: Smalltalk, I am
your grandfather!" thread for alternative viewpoints.

-- Jecel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Blake-5
In reply to this post by ccrraaiigg
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:49:38 -0800, Craig Latta <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Yet another fluff piece from O'Reilly. Wow, what a surprise.

I don't think I'd describe it as "fluff", exactly. A fluff piece usually  
just repeats some conventional wisdom and is harmless. Though perhaps  
that's what he IS doing, and I'm simply not aware of the conventions the  
wisdom is coming from.<s>

It's not a harmless idea, though. I'm always inclined to take someone  
seriously when they challenge a deeply held notion (of mine, it's no big  
deal to take someone seriously when they challenge someone else's deeply  
held notions<s>) but I got through the first half of the article feeling  
like this was one of those guys who never really "got" OOP, and that he  
was unaware of the fact that much effort has gone into correcting its  
shortcomings.

The second half, I couldn't follow at all. It wasn't clear to me that what  
he was proposing was any different from what we already have--a kind of  
chaotic mixture of expedient solutions. If so, then all he's really saying  
is, "Things are going great! Keep it up!" and I retract my earlier  
statement about it not being fluff. Heh.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Yoshiki Ohshima
In reply to this post by Brad Fuller
  I remember a guy in Germany posted an email from Alan Kay that
explains the history and viewpoint(s) of his take on
"object-oriented".

  That email is a good home work reading for the guy...

-- Yoshiki

At Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:01:51 -0300 ,
Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:

>
> Brad,
> > I'm very happy with the technical quality of O'Reilly books. Am I
> > missing something?
>
> everything that guy wrote makes perfect sense and is very true... from a
> certain viewpoint (to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi (no need to point out that I
> slightly changed the wording - I did it on purpose)). And that viewpoint
> is that OOP means Simula->C++->Java. See the "Algol: Smalltalk, I am
> your grandfather!" thread for alternative viewpoints.
>
> -- Jecel
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Brad Fuller
Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
  I remember a guy in Germany posted an email from Alan Kay that
explains the history and viewpoint(s) of his take on
"object-oriented".

  That email is a good home work reading for the guy...
  
do you have the email? I'd like to read it.
-- Yoshiki

At Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:01:51 -0300 ,
Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
  
Brad,
    
I'm very happy with the technical quality of O'Reilly books. Am I 
missing something?
      
everything that guy wrote makes perfect sense and is very true... from a
certain viewpoint (to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi (no need to point out that I
slightly changed the wording - I did it on purpose)). And that viewpoint
is that OOP means Simula->C++->Java. See the "Algol: Smalltalk, I am
your grandfather!" thread for alternative viewpoints.

-- Jecel

    


  


--

Brad Fuller
+1 (408) 799-6124
Sonaural Audio Studio
See Us At GDC 2006
Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com
See me on O'Reilly



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Yoshiki Ohshima
  Brad,

  I dug up the URL... but apparently it is gone.  Sumi-san (Cc'ed) may
have saved it.

http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_w33d45lg/doc_kay_oop_en

-- Yoshiki

At Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:21:46 -0800,
Brad Fuller wrote:

>
> [1  <multipart/alternative (7bit)>]
> [1.1  <text/plain; ISO-8859-1 (7bit)>]
>
> [1.2  <text/html; ISO-8859-1 (7bit)>]
> Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
>
>       I remember a guy in Germany posted an email from Alan Kay that
>     explains the history and viewpoint(s) of his take on
>     "object-oriented".
>    
>       That email is a good home work reading for the guy...
>
> do you have the email? I'd like to read it.
>
>     -- Yoshiki
>    
>     At Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:01:51 -0300 ,
>     Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
>
>         Brad,
>
>             I'm very happy with the technical quality of O'Reilly books. Am I
>             missing something?
>
>         everything that guy wrote makes perfect sense and is very true... from a
>         certain viewpoint (to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi (no need to point out that I
>         slightly changed the wording - I did it on purpose)). And that viewpoint
>         is that OOP means Simula->C++->Java. See the "Algol: Smalltalk, I am
>         your grandfather!" thread for alternative viewpoints.
>        
>         -- Jecel
>
> --
>
> Brad Fuller
> +1 (408) 799-6124
> Sonaural Audio Studio
> See Us At GDC 2006
> Hear us online: www.Sonaural.com
> See me on O'Reilly
>
>
> [2  <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>]
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Michael Haupt-3
Hi,

On 3/14/06, Yoshiki Ohshima <[hidden email]> wrote:
>   I dug up the URL... but apparently it is gone.  Sumi-san (Cc'ed) may
> have saved it.

http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/doc_kay_oop_en

On the page, it says, "To link to this page, please use the canonical
URI "http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/doc_kay_oop_en" only, because
any other URI is valid only temporarily."

Best,

Michael

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Brad Fuller
Michael Haupt wrote:
Hi,

On 3/14/06, Yoshiki Ohshima [hidden email] wrote:
  
  I dug up the URL... but apparently it is gone.  Sumi-san (Cc'ed) may
have saved it.
    

http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/doc_kay_oop_en

On the page, it says, "To link to this page, please use the canonical
URI "http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/doc_kay_oop_en" only, because
any other URI is valid only temporarily."

Best,

Michael


  
Thanks!



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Marcus Denker
In reply to this post by Yoshiki Ohshima

On 14.03.2006, at 00:34, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:

>   Brad,
>
>   I dug up the URL... but apparently it is gone.  Sumi-san (Cc'ed) may
> have saved it.
>
> http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_w33d45lg/doc_kay_oop_en
>

Alan posted a very nice mail to the Squeak list in 1998:

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~denker/AlanKayOOP.html

    Marcus

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Marcus Denker

On 14.03.2006, at 08:21, Marcus Denker wrote:

>
> On 14.03.2006, at 00:34, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
>>
>> http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_w33d45lg/doc_kay_oop_en
>>
>
> Alan posted a very nice mail to the Squeak list in 1998:
>
> http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~denker/AlanKayOOP.html

I forgot this link:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2950949730059754521

It's Alan's Keynote from OOSPA 1997 that is referenced in the Mail.
Good stuff.

(Thanks to ESUG, http://www.esug.org, for paying the cost for
digitizing the old VHS tape).

       Marcus

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Zulq Alam
Thanks!

Marcus Denker wrote:
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2950949730059754521
>
> It's Alan's Keynote from OOSPA 1997 that is referenced in the Mail.
> Good stuff.
>
> (Thanks to ESUG, http://www.esug.org, for paying the cost for
> digitizing the old VHS tape).

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?

Kendall Shaw
In reply to this post by Blake-5
Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:49:38 -0800, Craig Latta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>     Yet another fluff piece from O'Reilly. Wow, what a surprise.
>
> I don't think I'd describe it as "fluff", exactly. A fluff piece usually
> just repeats some conventional wisdom and is harmless. Though perhaps
> that's what he IS doing, and I'm simply not aware of the conventions the
> wisdom is coming from.<s>

I feel like I haven't really gotten a foothold in thinking about OO yet,
but my take on the article was that the author was actually arguing
against OO as a sort of procedural programming in a special syntax
together with inheritance, rather than actual object orientation. The
Mr. Kay email earlier in this thread didn't seem to me to contradict
what the author of the article was saying in substance.

The teetering towers of fragile class trees idea, if I have the
terminology right, is something I continue to read about and it's right
at the center of where I lack confidence in my understanding of OO.

My impression is that that problem is not well understood by people that
implement software that many of us have to use. So, I would read into
that a concern about the state of OOP in practice.

I remember reading a posting earlier about some object, Morph I think,
that I remember has a comment saying please don't override certain
methods here because it will break things. So, apparently it's an issue
of some concern in squeak as well.

It's uninteresting if the author was saying oop is good or oop is bad,
the substance of his argument is more interesting.

> The second half, I couldn't follow at all. It wasn't clear to me that
> what he was proposing was any different from what we already have--a
> kind of chaotic mixture of expedient solutions.

I didn't take him to be saying that XML syntax and javascript and web
this and web that are the answer. He talks about the separation of
intention and syntax. I think that is interesting.

As a novice, a problem I continue to have sporadically looking at
smalltalk is that it seems like a rather small isolated place in which
you have to talk. The environment seems very isolating, and it seems to
me like a problem of being bound to a syntax.

Maybe that's a way to avoid having to be corrupted by the view of the
world as being made up of procedures operating on data, when you
interact with the world and it's other programmers. But I want to
interact with the world.

So, I think it might be necessary to find some way to not be bound by
syntax in order to interact with the world, that doesn't require you
think in terms of "remote procedure calls" as that Mr. Kay email says.

These days I've been studying graphics. An approach I could take is to
pick a syntax, e.g. morphic or opengl etc., and learn little bits of
math together with the specifics of how to use an API.

It's very different to approach graphics using SVG as a study aid while
learning about graphics, because SVG is declarative. There is less of
the notion that you have procedures operating on data.

Or XSL-FO might be a better example of this idea, with respect to
typesetting/(voicesetting?). XSL-FO doesn't so much describe an API as a
model of pages and speech that can be used. XSL suggests approaching FO
production as developing transformation specifications that are
descriptions of a resulting document.

XML/SGML and Lisp seem to me to suggest this same idea.

This isn't expressing the idea that "the world is made of of streams and
transformations". It's not saying let's all put everything in XML and
use a transformation language, or let's use lisp.

If I read the author correctly, he was expressing the same notion of
using representations of systems as cooperating objects, that Mr. Kay
seemed to be talking about. He was then elaborating on developing
systems in terms of abstractions beyond APIs and language syntax.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Agile Programming Has Fallen Short, Conference Told InfoWorld [was: "Oops..." an article needing a reply?]

Klaus D. Witzel
In reply to this post by Yoshiki Ohshima
List,

let me add 2 pennies:

begin quote
In a presentation at the SD West 2006 Conference, Construx Software  
Builders' Steve McConnell argued that agile software development has not  
yet lived up to its promise, having been focused more on processes and  
tools than on people and interactions. "It seems to me that the promise of  
agile development has fallen short at least so far," said McConnell. In  
his presentation, McConnell offered his lists of best and worst ideas.  
McConnell claimed that agile development has been framed on the belief  
that developers can anticipate every possible requirement before building  
an architecture, an idea that made his "worst" list. Among McConnell's  
list of best ideas are the imperative of incremental software development,  
that fixing glitches decreases costs, and that software estimation  
abilities can be improved over time. McConnell also lauded the notion that  
full reuse is the most powerful form of reuse, and that intellectual flow  
guides software projects. Making McConnell's worst list are the ideas that  
the only software models are fully iterated or completely non-iterated,  
defect cost increase dynamics do not affect agile development projects,  
and that there is such a thing as a one-size-fits-all development approach.
end quote
from: http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/03/13/76420_HNmcconnell_1.html

Needless to point out that "the belief that developers can anticipate  
every possible requirement before building an architecture" is in stark  
contrast with what Smalltalk+Squeak was*and*still*is about :)

No surprise that, given the "applet" rush on and promise of J-static,  
folks (indiv's, corp's, investors) get more and more disappointed while  
asking for more bang for their bucks (and/or time+effort)!

/Klaus